In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants (1913)

Page scan 000181 from In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants

Record Details:

Title:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants
Date:
1913
Publisher:
New York, Appeal Printing Co.
Volume:
In the District Court of the United States, for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the United States of America, petitioner, vs. Motion Picture Patents Company, et al., defendants : record volume 4
Leaf #:
000181
Language:
English
Collection:
Government & Law and Early Cinema
Format:
Periodicals
Contributor:
The Museum of Modern Art Library, New York
Sponsor:
Media History Digital Library
Coordinator:
Media History Digital Library
Description:
These seven volumes contain the testimonies and supporting documents from the U.S. District Court's antitrust lawsuit against the Motion Picture Patents Company (MPPC). Formed in 1908, the MPPC (sometimes referred to asœ"the Edison Trust" or just "the Trust") sought to control the American film industry through pooling patents and demanding that producers and exhibitors acquire licenses to those patents. Independent producers and exhibitors, who refused to license the patents, argued that the MPPC was an unlawful monopoly. In 1912 and 1913, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania heard testimonies from both MPPC members, such as Siegmund Lubin, and "Independents" who later became Hollywood moguls, such as William Fox. Ultimately, in 1915, the case reached the U.S. Supreme Court, which found the MPPC in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and spelled the end for the already weakening MPPC. -- Eric Hoyt, 2012
Date Added:
September 12, 2024
Something wrong or inaccurate about this page? Let us Know!

Thanks for helping us continually improve the quality of the Lantern search engine for all of our users! We have millions of scanned pages, so user reports are incredibly helpful for us to identify places where we can improve and update the metadata.

Please describe the issue below, and click "Submit" to send your comments to our team! If you'd prefer, you can also send us an email to mhdl@commarts.wisc.edu with your comments.




We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.

Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.

J. A. Schuchert, Direct Examination. 2031 Q. Take Rochester. That is the next largest city in your territory, is it not? A. Yes. Q. What is the condition there as to the character of theatres served by your company and the other two? A. There are a number of large theatres there. Two of them, for example, each of which seat about 1,600. One is supplied by the independents, and the other the licensed. And there are a number of other theatres there that seat about a thousand. The business is equally divided. Q. And how about Erie, Pennsylvania? A. In Erie we supply three of the leading theatres there. One of these customers is a man who owns two theatres, of which in one of them he uses licensed, and in the other he uses independent. He used licensed in both of those theatres up until four or live months ago, when he decided to use the independents in one theatre. While he is a personal friend of mine, he told me he should prefer to give me the business of this other theatre, but the independent film did more business for him there, and that he would continue to use that. That he was paying as much money for that independent film in that house as I quoted him, or, in fact, as much as he was paying me before he left me with that theatre. Q. What other large cities are there in your territory? A. Syracuse. Q. What are the conditions there? A. About the same. We serve in there, and so does the Albany branch of the General Film Company. We have the business divided there between us, and then there is the independents, who have just as much business as the two of us combined. Q. And what class of theatres do the so-called independents serve in Syracuse? A. In fact, in Syracuse they have1 a larger theatre than we have. One, in fact, that was opened up on Thanksgiving Day, and the business was promised to us. They did not give it to us, though. They went to the independents. Q. Did the independents outbid you? A. I presume it is a question of price. Q. And how do your prices compare with the prices of the Mutual and Universal? A. I think they are getting fully as much money for their service. There might be a slight advance in our prices over theirs. Q. Are you familiar with the character of pictures turned out by the Mutual and independent people? A. Yes, sir.